Far enough to not really be up for driving down...i'm up in Toronto, Ontario, about 8 hour drive to Philly last i checked...i was actually planning on a trip down to VAC Motorsports if/when they get the N54 head figured out and its proven with gains but it doesn't look like its happening any time soon...

I'm friendly with those guys, if u get down any time soon let me know I'll show you around he town!

Can you elaborate on what you mean by thickness? Which dimension are you referring to, depth of the intercooler or height?

Either way, the anwer can be attributed to pressure loss. The more pressure drop the worse the system response. Give me an example case of what you are looking for and I can do the best to answer.

Ok Lets say you have a 24x12x3 inch intercooler vs a 24x12x5 inch. When I say 3inch or 5 inch I'm referring to the core thickness. I would like to know since its thicker how does that change spool time/lag. Since there is more are that needs to be charged. Also fin design also play a role I believe in intercooler design(bar and plate vs delta and fin)

Ok Lets say you have a 24x12x3 inch intercooler vs a 24x12x5 inch. When I say 3inch or 5 inch I'm referring to the core thickness. I would like to know since its thicker how does that change spool time/lag. Since there is more are that needs to be charged. Also fin design also play a role I believe in intercooler design(bar and plate vs delta and fin)

Ok in your example, there are two intercoolers. Both have identical frontal areas 24x12 but have different depths. The deeper intercooler will offer less pressure drop assuming the fin density and fin design is identical. This is example what the other guy was saying about resistors in parallel. If you add more flow area without increasing fin density you will reduce pressure drop.

You cant continue to make the intercooler deeper and deeper etc.. and assume pressure drop will just go own. There is diminishing returns. But within the range you gave me, the 2 inches of extra depth will greatly reduce gas velocity through the core which will reduce frictional pressure drop.

Another way to look at it is like this.

If you have two intercoolers, 24x12x3 and 24x12x5, same frontal areas but the 5 inch cooler has a denser fin count. You can no longer assume the pressure drop is the same, you changed two variables. The depth and the fin count. The fin count promotes pressure drop due to more exposed surface area (friction). So fin design also plays a major role in pressure drop. But since we are comparing two cores with identical properties except thickness, we can assume the deeper core will offer less pressure drop.

Let me ask another question. What if we went the other way around? What if you said compare a 24x12x3 to a 24x12x1, a thin 1 inch core. The gas will be screaming through there and pressure drop is proportional to the square of velocity.

If you had to choose between depth and height, always choose height because frontal area is what allows the most ambient air to become exposed to the fins. Deep cores loose effectiveness because once the air passes through the first 2 or 3 inches of core, it begins to heat up and it does a poorer job once it gets through the back half of the core to cool the air.

Fin design plays a huge role in pressure drop and heat transfer. Remember you cant have your cake and eat it to. Generally speaking, and this is generally. A very dense fin design with lots of turbulators and heat exchange will offer lots of pressure drop to go with it. Sometimes you can get away with low pressure drop cores that as 654 said, offer pressure drop only where it needs to be and that is AT THE FINS. The fins inside the core are the heart of the heat exchange, you do not want to lose pressure in the end tanks and through the plenums because that is just wasteful.

Heres another monkey wrench to throw at you.

What if I made an intercooler where the fins were so close together you could fit a sheet of paper between them. And you had 1000 fins, this is a very good heat exchanger but a very poor intercooler. The surface area of that cooler is probably close to a football field surface area, cant have that either. There needs to be compromise. A good intercooler uses the best of everything, low pressure drop end tanks, good entry into the core, efficienct fin count and moderate amounts of turbulation (if any at all) and good smooth exit into the charge pipe.

All of those things I mentioned in that last paragraph can be accomplished through the analytical design process using modern engineering tools which I wish more companies used today. Just my opinion.

I'm really interesting the time it takes to charge the intercooler with air when it comes to thickness, and how that effects lag. On my turbo setup I first had a delta and fin, and I then switched to a bar and plate. Both were 24x12x3, and I noticed the difference in the switch.

There are too many other variables that have changed just from looking at those two pictures. It seems to me that the delta fin design is intended to help better direct ambient air through the core fins. If those are literally the intercoolers you switched to and from, then you cant attribute any changes to the fin design because they are different sized units.

To be able to pinpoint the advantage over the delta fin design to the traditional plate and bar design, one would need to literally change out just the core and keep everything else identical, even the row density. There are so many other things that change that you cant just say one thing is the reason your spool up time went down/up, because you changed many things.

There are too many other variables that have changed just from looking at those two pictures. It seems to me that the delta fin design is intended to help better direct ambient air through the core fins. If those are literally the intercoolers you switched to and from, then you cant attribute any changes to the fin design because they are different sized units.

To be able to pinpoint the advantage over the delta fin design to the traditional plate and bar design, one would need to literally change out just the core and keep everything else identical, even the row density. There are so many other things that change that you cant just say one thing is the reason your spool up time went down/up, because you changed many things.

Well I believe when I changed the setup it helped get rid of heat. The other question about lag was related to the thickness of the core itself. Since it seems more area would need to be charged hence the thought there would be more lag.

Well I believe when I changed the setup it helped get rid of heat. The other question about lag was related to the thickness of the core itself. Since it seems more area would need to be charged hence the thought there would be more lag.

If the only thing you changed was your intercooler and you experienced noticeably more lag, then something isnt right. Either the new intercooler you used has much higher pressure drop and becomes a significant restriction in your cold side system, or something else changed.

How drastic of a difference in spool up did you notice? Was it seat of the pants? Do you have a dyno of the before and after? That would help pinpoint where the lag problem started.

If the only thing you changed was your intercooler and you experienced noticeably more lag, then something isnt right. Either the new intercooler you used has much higher pressure drop and becomes a significant restriction in your cold side system, or something else changed.

How drastic of a difference in spool up did you notice? Was it seat of the pants? Do you have a dyno of the before and after? That would help pinpoint where the lag problem started.

Not lag but less heat soak, and it seems like it spooled better then with the delta and fin design.

tested in far from typical conditions...sorry it took so long to reply but ive been away for a while...anyways this is a informative thread, its not about whos IC is better than the other. Im happy with my IC, and youre happy with yours and thats all that matters at the end of the day

I don't want to de-rail the thread too much, but what is the general consensus for the best intercooler (with high pressure, in case I want to run meth) for the N54 right now? Helix seems popular, anything else?

It is the threads like this one, and the people that make this forum great. Shows how open our community is to sharing knowledge.

Another question regarding intercooler. I do not know if this has been covered or not, so here it goes. This is regarding tube and fine, and bar and plate. I always wondered why does bar and plate intercooler has a greater capacity to cool the air down better than tube and fin. Majority of the test results I have seen over time, reveal that bar and plate cools better then tube and fine. However I never really understood why that is.

I don't want to de-rail the thread too much, but what is the general consensus for the best intercooler (with high pressure, in case I want to run meth) for the N54 right now? Helix seems popular, anything else?

It is the threads like this one, and the people that make this forum great. Shows how open our community is to sharing knowledge.

Over the years of owning few turbo cars. I personally have come to 1 conclusion, there is no "best" intercooler. You just have to figure out which one is the most suited for your set-up. Helix can be a great intercooler for you, but not for someone else.

Another question regarding intercooler. I do not know if this has been covered or not, so here it goes. This is regarding tube and fine, and bar and plate. I always wondered why does bar and plate intercooler has a greater capacity to cool the air down better than tube and fin. Majority of the test results I have seen over time, reveal that bar and plate cools better then tube and fine. However I never really understood why that is.

I would imagine it has to do with the amount of surface area exposed to the flow per unit volume of intercooler core, that and also more turbulence = better heat dissipation which is another factor that may not be evident when comparing both designs (one design doesnt necessarily experience more turbulence than the other but perhaps it has a better surface area density?).

Thanks for the reply, lets see what he says. Im sure its an improvement over stock, as most are, but it also seems to have fairly well designed endtanks that avoid a lot of the issues that others have (like the AA one). Although the quality of the unit is at question due to the location of origin...

So I've recently gone ahead and purchased an aftermarket FMIC. However, having it on the car for a week, I realised (after reading around the forums bit more) that I may have received an older stock, probably inferior FMIC due to having 8 charge rows instead of the 10. It has come to my attention that the 10 charge row version is the newer revision. So, I'm in a pickle as to what to do. I soloed the DIY and it was tough work getting it done by myself. I have not as yet contacted the vendor about this, but have discovered that other customers have been in my situation also with regards to this FMIC.

I have since contacted the company that manufactures the FMIC to ask whether there is any significant difference between the 2 editions. However, upon reading this thread, I want to know what you guys think - the overall size is the same, just that mine has 8 charge rows instead of the newer 10. It's going to be such a hassle (or even whether it's possible) to get the vendor to do an exchange. Who's paying for postage? And, I've noticed a couple of rocks have already dented some fins.

Yeah, I know I shoulda checked more carefully and done more research prior, but it's pretty difficult to know everything there is to know about your purchase - sometimes you learn as you go along. I also think that some of you may know the company I'm talking about. Anyway, I just want to know if there is any significant difference between ver1 and ver2. Thanks!